Suchergebnisse

AbstractThis article makes two conceptual contributions to social policy literature. First, we summarise key concepts and insights from Gøsta Esping‐Andersen's major books, tracing his work in 'two lives': 'the foundations, or the welfare state between states and markets' and 'the demographic turn'. Analysing the 'first life', we revisit the centrality of the decommodification and social stratification concepts and the seeds of the social investment approach. Further, we explore Esping‐Andersen's masterful analysis of the double bind of the welfare state (supporting full‐employment and redistributional harmony) in a post‐industrial era and how countries belonging to different regimes have dealt with it. Through his 'second life', we explore the 'impossible marriage' between full employment and equality, and the development of the social investment approach. Our second contribution is to critically analyse a tension—generated by the shift from a broad to a narrow social policy perspective—between the two lives and how it raises questions for contemporary social policy. We suggest the field should take stock of Esping‐Andersen's work holistically, going beyond a simplistic use of welfare regime typologies and the universal proposition of a Scandinavian‐style social investment approach. This approach tends to overlook factors related to the international context (e.g., the expansion of the market logic, and questions of exchange, inflation and debt) when assessing the impact of social policy on key outcomes. Our ultimate goal is to revive a research programme based on the integration between social policy and international political economy, a programme geared at critically assessing issues related to gender equality, employment and redistribution.

AbstractWe conceptualise and measure welfare state change across 21 high‐income countries as a continuum delineated by a double movement, that is, the combined change of compensatory and employment‐oriented policies. Our double movement framework readapts Polanyi's concept into the context of welfare state change. We analyse this double movement across four decades using Principal Component Analysis and a new indicator that compares spending in 2015 to maximum and minimum spending levels since the 1980. We contribute to the literature in three ways. First, we empirically document an overall change in spending for compensatory and employment‐oriented policies, with the latter becoming more prominent over time. This change is more pronounced in the 1990s and even more so in the 2000s, and partially reduced classic regime differences. The PCAs generate a Cartesian space where each country is positioned across time (the 1980s, the 1990s, the 2000s and the 2010s) and space (within four quadrants, i.e., 'the strong employment‐oriented space', 'the weak employment‐oriented space', 'the strong compensatory space', and 'the weak compensatory space'). Second, we develop a fivefold taxonomy of welfare state change characterised by: (1) retrenchment in Canada, Germany, Ireland, Netherlands, Sweden and the United Kingdom; (2) abridged adaptation in Australia, Belgium, Finland, Norway, Spain and the United States; (3) minor expansionary adaptation in Greece, Italy, Japan, Portugal and Switzerland—where spending levels were low in the 1980; (4) adaptation with an equilibrium between the two movements in New Zealand and (5) strong expansionary adaptation in Austria, Denmark and France. Overall retrenchment and abridging adaptation prevail over expansionary adaptation—this is due to cutbacks of unemployment, family allowances and active labour market programmes not being counterbalanced by the expansion of childcare. Third, we critically interpret these changes, introducing the double movement concept into comparative social policy.

In a political economy context characterized by welfare state retrenchment, family policy transformation is a prominent feature of social policy change in high-income countries. Childcare is a key element of this transformation, and its expansion has been championed to promote female employment, gender equality, the conciliation of paid and unpaid work, and the mitigation of the social reproduction crisis. This paper interprets critically this transformation in terms of a retrenchment of compensatory income support policies for families (e.g. family allowances, unemployment, income maintenance), the expansion of services and active programmes (e.g. childcare, active labour market programmes) and the increasing commodification of social reproduction. Accordingly, we suggest the existence of a double movement. Childcare expansion – together with the retrenchment of compensatory income support policies – appears to provide further incentives for mothers to more readily accept low salaries in a service-based economy. It serves also to liberate mothers partially from social reproduction tasks, and it fosters the overall shift toward a dual earner model. The first movement suggests family policy expansion to be another tool to foster neoliberal capitalism. The second movement, in contrast, indicates that family policy expansion is instrumental in supporting working parents with young children, and helps to meet increasing care costs in a more gender-friendly context. On the basis of our empirical data, the first movement seems to prevail over the second in a majority of high-income countries. Further, childcare usage is influenced by household income level in most countries; this magnifies the negative distributional effects of cutting compensatory income support policies. Family policy transformation in a context of welfare state retrenchment does not seem to significantly challenge long-standing class and gender inequalities, and, in the transition from the Fordist to the post-Fordist sexual contract, contributes in ...

In a political economy context characterized by welfare state retrenchment, family policy transformation is a prominent feature of social policy change in high-income countries. Childcare is a key element of this transformation, and its expansion has been championed to promote female employment, gender equality, the conciliation of paid and unpaid work, and the mitigation of the social reproduction crisis. This paper interprets critically this transformation in terms of a retrenchment of compensatory income support policies for families (e.g. family allowances, unemployment, income maintenance), the expansion of services and active programmes (e.g. childcare, active labour market programmes) and the increasing commodification of social reproduction. Accordingly, we suggest the existence of a double movement. Childcare expansion – together with the retrenchment of compensatory income support policies – appears to provide further incentives for mothers to more readily accept low salaries in a service-based economy. It serves also to liberate mothers partially from social reproduction tasks, and it fosters the overall shift toward a dual earner model. The first movement suggests family policy expansion to be another tool to foster neoliberal capitalism. The second movement, in contrast, indicates that family policy expansion is instrumental in supporting working parents with young children, and helps to meet increasing care costs in a more gender-friendly context. On the basis of our empirical data, the first movement seems to prevail over the second in a majority of high-income countries. Further, childcare usage is influenced by household income level in most countries; this magnifies the negative distributional effects of cutting compensatory income support policies. Family policy transformation in a context of welfare state retrenchment does not seem to significantly challenge long-standing class and gender inequalities, and, in the transition from the Fordist to the post-Fordist sexual contract, contributes in most countries to perpetrate these inequalities under new forms.

AbstractThe article reviews the available quantitative evidence on the relationship between explicit family policy and women's employment outcomes in 45 high‐income countries between 1980 and 2016. At the methodological level, we gathered 238 papers through a four‐stage systematic qualitative review. We included articles published in English in international journals or by leading research institutes. Despite the accrued importance of the field, comparative works and national case studies do not sufficiently engage one another for methodological and disciplinary reasons. Our contribution is to integrate the findings from both streams of the literature in two ways. First, we chart systematically the debate describing its evolution over four decades, the disciplines involved (demography, economics, politics, social policy, sociology, and interdisciplinary work), and the geographical and policy breadth of the empirical contributions. Second, we provide a rich guide for scholars in the field by exploring how national case studies fit (or not) the broad trends captured in comparative research and discussing key and controversial debates in the field. In conclusion, we point out also important gaps in the literature and propose new avenues for future research. An exhaustive set of tables provides information on each comparative and national case study and on the databases and variables employed in the literature.

Durant les trois dernières décennies, les politiques familiales des pays riches ont connu un essor qui contraste avec le mouvement global d'austérité engagé par les États-providence. Les régimes de politiques familiales semblent converger progressivement vers le modèle Earning Carer et le schéma suédois – caractérisé par des dépenses élevées dans les services publics de garde d'enfants et un partage plus égalitaire des congés parentaux. Ce modèle semble aussi promouvoir la participation des femmes au marché du travail. Dans ce contexte, cet article vise principalement à discuter de ces évolutions selon les concepts que Polanyi emploie dans son ouvrage majeur, La Grande Transformation. Suivant son approche analytique, nous suggérons que l'essor des politiques familiales peut être compris en lien avec le désengagement de l'État-providence et le développement global de l'économie politique (political economy), et qu'il génère deux mouvements de sens opposés. D'un côté, l'accroissement des politiques familiales – parallèlement au désengagement de l'État-providence – semble inciter les mères à accepter plus facilement des salaires modestes dans une économie fondée sur les services. De l'autre, il contribue en partie à les libérer des activités de soins et d'accompagnement (care). Une première interprétation considère les politiques familiales comme un nouvel outil de promotion du capitalisme néolibéral, tandis qu'une seconde y voit une assistance essentielle aux parents de jeunes enfants pour surmonter la hausse des coûts de prise en charge. Ces deux phénomènes interagissent, mais sous l'impact croissant du désengagement de l'État-providence, le premier mouvement semble plus déterminant que le second.

During the past two decades, the debate over the relation between family policy and women's employment in high-income countries has grown in prominence. Nevertheless, the evidence proposed in different disciplines – sociology, politics, economics and demography – remains scattered and fragmented. This article addresses this gap, discussing whether family policy regimes are converging and how different policies influence women's employment outcomes in high-income countries. The main findings can be summarized as follows: family policy regimes ('Primary Caregiver Strategy', 'Choice Strategy', 'Primary Earner Strategy', 'Earning Carer Strategy', 'Mediterranean Model') continues to shape women's employment outcomes despite some process of convergence towards the Earning Carer Strategy; the shortage of childcare and the absence of maternal leave curtail women's employment; long parental leave seems to put a brake to women's employment; unconditional child benefits and joint couple's taxation negatively influence women's employment but support horizontal redistribution; policies and collective attitudes interact, influencing women's behaviour in the labour market; and the effect of policies is moderated/magnified by individual socioeconomic characteristics, that is, skills, class, education, income, ethnicity and marital status. The article concludes by suggesting avenues for future research.

Le présent article a deux objectifs. Premièrement, en s'appuyant sur une échelle à trois degrés, il cherche à déterminer les formes et l'intensité de la « générosité » de la politique familiale ainsi que son évolution au cours des trente dernières années dans dix-huit pays de l'Organisation de coopération et de développement économiques (OCDE). Deuxièmement, il identifie les principaux facteurs de ces évolutions. Au sein de la zone OCDE, les politiques familiales sont dans l'ensemble plus « généreuses » que dans les années 1980 (sauf aux États-Unis). Leur évolution a toutefois été plus ou moins marquée suivant les pays (l'Allemagne, la Norvège, l'Irlande et le Japon étant ceux où le changement a été le plus net). Si, au cours des années 1980 et 1990, la puissance des partis sociaux-démocrates et les mouvements féministes expliquent principalement cette expansion, les préférences de l'opinion publique semblent jouer un rôle plus déterminant depuis une quinzaine d'années.

The article investigates the relationship between the welfare state and social capital in Europe during the 1990s and the 2000s using structural equation modelling (SEM). By formulating and testing the hypothesis that welfare state generosity and welfare state size have different effects on social capital, we reassess the explanatory power of the main theories in the field and the findings of previous empirical work. We strongly support the contention of institutional theory that there is a positive association between high degrees of welfare state generosity and social capital. Moreover, we partially confirm the concern of neoclassical and communitarian theories for the negative correlation between large-size welfare states and social capital. The positive relationship between welfare state generosity and social capital is much stronger than the negative association observed with welfare state size. Finally, we interpret the considerable cross-country variation using welfare regime theory and several country cases. We illuminate different mechanisms linking welfare state development and social capital creation, discussing the Danish and Dutch third sector experiences and pointing to Sweden as an exceptional case of decline. Furthermore, we highlight the importance of regional variation in Belgium, Germany and Italy and complement the analysis also briefly discussing the Austrian, French, Irish and British cases.

During the past two decades, the debate over the relation between family policy and women's employment in high-income countries has grown in prominence. Nevertheless, the evidence proposed in different disciplines – sociology, politics, economics and demography – remains scattered and fragmented. This article addresses this gap, discussing whether family policy regimes are converging and how different policies influence women's employment outcomes in high-income countries. The main findings can be summarized as follows: family policy regimes ('Primary Caregiver Strategy', 'Choice Strategy', 'Primary Earner Strategy', 'Earning Carer Strategy', 'Mediterranean Model') continues to shape women's employment outcomes despite some process of convergence towards the Earning Carer Strategy; the shortage of childcare and the absence of maternal leave curtail women's employment; long parental leave seems to put a brake to women's employment; unconditional child benefits and joint couple's taxation negatively influence women's employment but support horizontal redistribution; policies and collective attitudes interact, influencing women's behaviour in the labour market; and the effect of policies is moderated/magnified by individual socioeconomic characteristics, that is, skills, class, education, income, ethnicity and marital status. The article concludes by suggesting avenues for future research.

During the past two decades, the debate over the relation between family policy and women's employment in high-income countries has grown in prominence. Nevertheless, the evidence proposed in different disciplines – sociology, politics, economics and demography – remains scattered and fragmented. This article addresses this gap, discussing whether family policy regimes are converging and how different policies influence women's employment outcomes in high-income countries. The main findings can be summarized as follows: family policy regimes ('Primary Caregiver Strategy', 'Choice Strategy', 'Primary Earner Strategy', 'Earning Carer Strategy', 'Mediterranean Model') continues to shape women's employment outcomes despite some process of convergence towards the Earning Carer Strategy; the shortage of childcare and the absence of maternal leave curtail women's employment; long parental leave seems to put a brake to women's employment; unconditional child benefits and joint couple's taxation negatively influence women's employment but support horizontal redistribution; policies and collective attitudes interact, influencing women's behaviour in the labour market; and the effect of policies is moderated/magnified by individual socioeconomic characteristics, that is, skills, class, education, income, ethnicity and marital status. The article concludes by suggesting avenues for future research.